News Shai Bolton just asked for his $20k back….

[Meteoric Rise]

Melksham and May zero AFL punishment for upsetting each other and having a public brawl.

Bolton lost 20 large for protecting his mate and pregnant girlfriend from violent harassment.

Violence is never the answer if you play for one club and are protecting people from attack. But it is the answer if you want to have a swing at someone who upset your feelings. But in deciding that violence is the answer in this scenario the AFL also wants everyone to know that violence is never the answer.

Makes sense.

 

[smasha]

Melksham and May zero AFL punishment for upsetting each other and having a public brawl.

Bolton lost 20 large for protecting his mate and pregnant girlfriend from violent harassment.

Violence is never the answer if you play for one club and are protecting people from attack. But it is the answer if you want to have a swing at someone who upset your feelings. But in deciding that violence is the answer in this sceanrio the AFL also wants everyone to know that violence is never the answer.

Makes sense.

Richmond have a different rulebook even off the field.

 

[scoman]

Wasn't May suspended by Melbourne already?

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Wasn't May suspended by Melbourne already?

So Bolton protecting friends including a woman from violent attack. Gets the following massive punishments:

• $20k fine
• made to have dinner at Gil’s house, yuk.

Melksham from all accounts defending himself from verbal and physical aggression:

- no penalty, if the reports are correct possibly fair enough but the same should be applied to Bolton

May

- from all accounts instigates the whole thing both verbally then physically, 1 week and doesn’t get made to have dinner at Gil’s house. No fine.

If reports on the Melksham/May incident are correct, May should get $50k and 4 weeks. If reports are incorrect and Melksham was more complicit, then he should be punished accordingly.

The whole thing doesn’t add up properly.

 

[Toump Ass]

Now now now, time to tell the truth.

The AFL found that Richmond lied about what happened and that Bolton "exacerbated" the situation.

Bolton got off very lightly IMO.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Now now now, time to tell the truth.

The AFL found that Richmond lied about what happened and that Bolton "exacerbated" the situation.

Bolton got off very lightly IMO.

Right ok.

But May creating the situation in the first place then taking the first swing is worth 1 week?

And of course Melksham didn’t exacerbate the situation by knocking May’s teeth down his throat….

And on Bolton, protecting people who are being assaulted, since when is that exacerbating the situation? Do you actually trust the AFL’s finding as being definitive and fairly arrived at?

They appear to be applying differing standards and definitions here. If violence is never the answer and Bolton was supposed to walk away and report it to the authorities or whatever, why isn’t Melksham expected to do the same?

The law allows the application of reasonable force in defending yourself, property, and others. The AFL seem to accept this in Melksham’s case, but not in Bolton’s. If Bolton applied unreasonable force, why did the police not charge him?

It doesn’t seem right somewhere along the line. But forgetting Melksham and Bolton for a moment. May one week for making a campaigner of himself and starting a fight in a public place. That seems an incredibly light punishment to me in a "violence is never the answer” world.

Violence is never the answer is absolute hogwash of course. There are loads of scenarios where violence is a perfectly acceptable answer. As the AFL have just admitted by sanctioning no punishment for Melksham - whilst in the same breath saying violence is never the answer.

Do you really trust the people responsible for that logical malfunction to make good and fair decisions?

 

[Toump Ass]

Do you actually trust the AFL’s finding as being definitive and fairly arrived at?

As much as I trust Rioli, Bolton, Hardwick, and the Richmond Football Club... sure.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

As much as I trust Rioli, Bolton, Hardwick, and the Richmond Football Club... sure.

OK, now present your evidence for your claims Richmond lied….and explain why you are distinguishing Melksham’s actions from Bolton’s….

And why you think Bolton should get a stiffer penalty, but presumably May should not.

 

[WestCoast05]

Melksham and May zero AFL punishment for upsetting each other and having a public brawl.

Bolton lost 20 large for protecting his mate and pregnant girlfriend from violent harassment.

Violence is never the answer if you play for one club and are protecting people from attack. But it is the answer if you want to have a swing at someone who upset your feelings. But in deciding that violence is the answer in this scenario the AFL also wants everyone to know that violence is never the answer.

Makes sense.

Look let's not turn young blokes getting egotistical and brawling in the club into some type of heroic robin hood story

But you're 100% right that Shai (and maybe others) should be wondering why the AFL chose to fine him and the Dees players get off free (1 week, pffft).
The May Melksham situation does sound a lot worse from a number of angles so yeah he has every right to feel aggrieved, it's a large amount of money.
At least if you go to a club ppl are semi-expecting drunken troublesome thug behaviour - May trashed a table at a fancy, french restaurant!?

 

[HTPunter]

OK, now present your evidence for your claims Richmond lied….and explain why you are distinguishing Melksham’s actions from Bolton’s….

And why you think Bolton should get a stiffer penalty, but presumably May should not.

Because Richmond have shown to be self serving and arrogant on multiple occasions off field in recent years??

Where's your evidence the AFL lied?

 

[theyellowsash]

mate its richmond, of course the punishment was unfairly high.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Because Richmond have shown to be self serving and arrogant on multiple occasions off field in recent years??

Where's your evidence the AFL lied?

Who said the AFL lied? My allegation against them is their decisions about the 3 players lack consistency and in May’s case just straight out looks a wrongly light penalty.

 

[D-N-R]

One is an intraclub matter an the other is one involving members of the public. That's the difference.

 

[theyellowsash]

One is an intraclub matter an the other is one involving members of the public. That's the difference.

so the owners of the restaurant they smashed are part of the club?

I dont recall bolton having caused property damage as part of a brawl with friends.

 

[MisterMarcus]

OK, now present your evidence for your claims Richmond lied….and explain why you are distinguishing Melksham’s actions from Bolton’s….

And why you think Bolton should get a stiffer penalty, but presumably May should not.

The thing that always got me was how neither the players or the club seemed remotely interested in pursuing the matter, and Richmond supporters around here were absolutely desperate to shut the issue down and have it go away.

If I truly believed a Geelong player's partner was "violently sexually assaulted", or if I thought a Geelong player stepped in to defend a woman and got innocently caught in the crossfire, I sure as hell wouldn't be calling for everyone to drop the issue and move on. I'd want a serious investigation and serious answers.

Nothing like that was forthcoming from the club, the players or the fans. Seems odd to me if what Richmond fans claimed was the true series of events.

 

[theyellowsash]

The thing that always got me was how neither the players or the club seemed remotely interested in pursuing the matter, and Richmond supporters around here were absolutely desperate to shut the issue down and have it go away.

If I truly believed a Geelong player's partner was "violently sexually assaulted", or if I thought a Geelong player stepped in to defend a woman and got innocently caught in the crossfire, I sure as hell wouldn't be calling for everyone to drop the issue and move on. I'd want a serious investigation and serious answers.

Nothing like that was forthcoming from the club, the players or the fans. Seems odd to me if what Richmond fans claimed was the true series of events.

soooooooo, no evidence, just speculation.

also just lol if you think reporting a minor sexual harassment to the police will do anything, when a woman can walk into a cop station with bruises and get nothing. most serious assaults arent reported because they know nothing will happen, let alone something on the smaller scale.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

The thing that always got me was how neither the players or the club seemed remotely interested in pursuing the matter, and Richmond supporters around here were absolutely desperate to shut the issue down and have it go away.

If I truly believed a Geelong player's partner was "violently sexually assaulted", or if I thought a Geelong player stepped in to defend a woman and got innocently caught in the crossfire, I sure as hell wouldn't be calling for everyone to drop the issue and move on. I'd want a serious investigation and serious answers.

Nothing like that was forthcoming from the club, the players or the fans. Seems odd to me if what Richmond fans claimed was the true series of events.

That’s fair enough, Richmond FC and Bolton accepted that in the face of Rioli’s partner being harassed and Rioli being belted trying to protect her, Bolton is supposed to walk away and do nothing or step in to protect and not belt the campaigner, as he did.

But then that sets a standard doesn’t it? And so someone in Melksham’s shoes is also supposed to walk away and report, rather than belt the clown who is causing the trouble?

As for May, the clown actually causing the trouble…if it was fine for Melksham to belt him - and it probably was from what I can tell - then May must be more heavily punished than 1 week from club + no fine, surely?

 

[Area51]

AFL lives and breathes dollars and sees Richmond as a cash cow. Also works as part of their financial equalisation policy.

 

[theyellowsash]

AFL lives and breathes dollars and sees Richmond as a cash cow. Also works as part of their financial equalisation policy.

same reason lynch was the only one fined for the 3qr time wrestle last night. who was he wrestling, a ghost?

 

[matthew_s]

same reason lynch was the only one fined for the 3qr time wrestle last night. who was he wrestling, a ghost?

What are you talking about?

Match Review: Big Tiger, Blue charged with wrestling after fiery clash​

The AFL advises that the Match Review of the Round 14 Thursday game has been completed. Two charges were laid and there were no incidents that required a detailed explanation.

Charges laid:

Tom Lynch, Richmond, has been charged with Wrestling Lachie Plowman, Carlton, during the third quarter of the Round 14 match between Richmond and Carlton played at the MCG on Thursday, June 16 2022.

In summary, the player can accept a $1000 sanction with an early plea.

A first offence for Wrestling is a $1500 sanction. An early plea enables the player to accept a $1000 sanction.

Lachie Plowman, Carlton, has been charged with Wrestling Tom Lynch, Richmond, during the third quarter of the Round 14 match between Richmond and Carlton played at the MCG on Thursday, June 16 2022.

In summary, the player can accept a $1500 sanction with an early plea.

A second offence for Wrestling is a $2500 sanction. An early plea enables the player to accept a $1500 sanction.

Match Review: Big Tiger, Blue charged with wrestling after fiery clash

The Match Review has completed its findings from Thursday night's clash

www.afl.com.au

 

[theyellowsash]

What are you talking about?

Match Review: Big Tiger, Blue charged with wrestling after fiery clash​

The AFL advises that the Match Review of the Round 14 Thursday game has been completed. Two charges were laid and there were no incidents that required a detailed explanation.

Charges laid:

Tom Lynch, Richmond, has been charged with Wrestling Lachie Plowman, Carlton, during the third quarter of the Round 14 match between Richmond and Carlton played at the MCG on Thursday, June 16 2022.

In summary, the player can accept a $1000 sanction with an early plea.

A first offence for Wrestling is a $1500 sanction. An early plea enables the player to accept a $1000 sanction.

Lachie Plowman, Carlton, has been charged with Wrestling Tom Lynch, Richmond, during the third quarter of the Round 14 match between Richmond and Carlton played at the MCG on Thursday, June 16 2022.

In summary, the player can accept a $1500 sanction with an early plea.

A second offence for Wrestling is a $2500 sanction. An early plea enables the player to accept a $1500 sanction.

Match Review: Big Tiger, Blue charged with wrestling after fiery clash

The Match Review has completed its findings from Thursday night's clash

www.afl.com.au

Thats been changed. Original article said lynch only. Though lets be honest, it wasn't just those two, and it was Cripps who started it in the first place

 

[matthew_s]

Thats been changed. Original article said lynch only. Though lets be honest, it wasn't just those two, and it was Cripps who started it in the first place

It’s the AFL way, the instigator gets off and the retaliator gets pinged.